Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-10-09 CITY OF PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES October 9, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 12:30 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioners Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ronald Gregory, Chairman X 15 3 Kristi Hanson X 15 2 Neil Lingle X 12 4 Richard O'Donnell X 12 3 Chris Van Vliet X 17 1 John Vuksic X 17 1 Also Present: Phil Drell, Director, Community Development Steve Smith, Planning Manager Martin Alvarez, Associate Planner Tony Bagato, Planning Technician Gail Santee, Senior Office Assistant Spencer Knight, Landscape Manager Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 25, 2001 Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the minutes of September 25, 2001. The motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Lingle abstaining. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS A. The Commission requested staff to send a reminder to the City Council that Commissioner Connor's replacement had not been named. Landscape Architect is requested. 1 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES A. Final Drawings 1. CASE NO.: SA 01-117 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SICo INDUSTRIES, INC., 1342 Bell Avenue, Suite K, Tustin, CA 92780 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of new business signage, non-illuminated awnings, and two 3-foot clocks for COSMO'S ITALIAN KITCHEN LOCATION: 73-155 Hwy. 111 ZONE: C-1 The Commission was provided with plans for new business signage, non-illuminated awnings, and two 3-foot diameter clocks for Cosmo's Italian Kitchen in the former La Bamba Mandarin Palace location. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Wet to approve the plans as presented by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Lingle absent. 2. CASE NO.: PP 01-03 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SABBY JONATHAN, COOK STREET ASSOCIATES, LLC, 42-620 Caroline Court, Suite 120, Palm Desert, CA 92211 ALLEN SANBORN, SANBORN ARCHITECTURE, 1227 S. Gene Autry Trail, #C, Palm Springs, CA 92264 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of architectural plans for 16,000 square foot office/industrial building and landscape plans LOCATION: 42-595 Cook Street ZONE: PC-2 G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 2 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES The Commission reviewed the architectural plans for this project noting that no changes had been made since its endorsement of the revisions during its June 12, 2001, meeting. The City's Landscape Manager made written comments on the landscape plan. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to approve the plans as presented by minute motion subject to comments made by the City's Landscape Manager. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Lingle absent. 3. CASE NO.: SA 01-115 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): PALMS TO PINES CANVAS, 69690 Sugarloaf Avenue, #69, Mt. Center, CA 92561 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of new business signage for SHANNON MARTIN LOCATION: 73-200 El Paseo ZONE: C-1 Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to approve the plans as presented by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Lingle absent. 4. CASE NO: SA 01-120 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CALENDAR GIRLS SIGNS, 73-885 Highway 111, Suite 2, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of new business signage for BUSCHLENMOWATT GALLERIES LOCATION: 45-188 Portola ZONE: C-1 G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 3 *&W ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to approve the plans as presented by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Lingle absent. 5. CASE NO.: SA 01-116 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIGNS BY MEL, 41-841 BEACON HILL, SUITE D, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 for COMPLETE HOME THEATER SYSTEMS NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identification signage LOCATION: 74-111 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 Mr. Alvarez explained the request was for a box sign that will have cut- out "H". The letters will be routed out, backed with red flex, the background will be opaque (no light will be coming through) and the "Complete" and "Systems" will be non-illuminated bronze, individual letters. The music note will be grey, exposed neon mounted on the base of the sign. There will be an opening at the bottom and top of the sign from which light will be projected down and up to highlight "Complete" and "Systems". It is a unique sign using the can configured in the shape of its logo and using white flex background for the rectangles along the bottom and top edges to simulate a film strip. The sign is 11 feet on a 14-foot fascia. Commissioner Van Vliet stated it was a big can sign with a depth of 8 inches. It seems it could be a lot less. The applicant agreed it could be reduced in depth. Commissioner Vuksic stated the box was being used as an element, not just a box, which makes it acceptable. The "H" can be projected out as will the music note. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to approve the wall-mounted business signage subject to the box being narrowed to 4 inches and the "H" and music note being 6 inches. Motion carried 6-0. GRanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 4 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES 6. CASE NO.: PP 00-12 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): SIXTH STREET PARTNERS, 7143 Katella, Suite B., Stanton, CA 90680 RICK BLOMGREN, AIA, Axcess Architects, 186542 Florida Street, #200, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Reconsideration of Commission's approval on Building 7 LOCATION: 77-932 Country Club Drive ZONE: PC-2 (FCO) Mr. Smith stated the Commission had approved the working drawings during its last meeting subject to increasing the size of the columns on the east end. He noted he had talked to the architect afterwards who stated he was matching the existing columns on the other end of the center. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to deny the reconsideration and re-affirm its previous decision to increase the size of the columns on the east end. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Lingle absent. 7. CASE NO.: C 01-06 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): OCHOA &ASSOCIATES, 73-626 Hwy. 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of working drawings (BERKELEY) LOCATION: 73-221 Hwy. 111 ZONE: C-1 G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 5 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to approve the plans as presented by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Lingle absent. 8. CASE NO.: TT 30025 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): WORLD DEVELOPMENT, 74-333, Suite 103, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Revised preliminary approval for 4 single-family models, PETUNIA PLACE LOCATION: 37-555 Portola Avenue ZONE: P.R. 5 Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet to grant preliminary and final approval to the plans as presented. Staff was directed to approve working drawings when submitted as long as they match the plans approved today. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Lingle absent. 9. CASE NO.: TT-30216 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): Mario Gonzales, GHA Paloma Group, LLC, 68-936 Adelina Road, Cathedral City, CA 92234 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of an exception to allow a 7-foot, 6-inch high perimeter block wall LOCATION: Sundance Court, west side of Shepherd Lane, 2,000 feet north of Frank Sinatra Drive ZONE: PR 5 Mr. Alvarez explained this was a new subdivision on Shepherd Lane and Frank Sinatra. The development consists of two opposite cul-de- sacs, running east and west. The applicant is requesting 7-foot perimeter block walls along Shepherd Lane. There is a twenty foot setback, landscaping, the opportunity to berm up to the wall, and 8-foot G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\ggmin\AR011009.min.wpd 6 NOW *.40W ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES sidewalks. The height of the wall is being dictated because of the two- foot pad height differences. The walls meet the City's minimum interior wall height of 5-foot, 6-inches. The applicant will make every effort through berming to make the wall height six feet. Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, to approve the walls subject to using berming to reduce the height of the walls where applicable. Motion carried 4-0-2 with Commissioners Gregory and O'Donnell absent. 10. CASE NO.: VAR 01-02 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): CAROLYN BROWN, 47-833 Sun Corral Trail, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of an exemption to allow a redwood, 6-foot high gate and reduced setback in front of garage. LOCATION: 47-833 Sun Corral Trail ZONE: R-1 Mr. Drell stated the issue began in 1997 when the applicant requested some wood fencing in his front yard. It is unclear what was approved and built in 1997 and what was built very recently in connection with a new part of the building. The ordinance requires that 6-foot fences be set back 15 feet and wooden fences are not an approved front-yard material. The 6-foot redwood gate is not only within the setback, it is also in the right of way. One edge of fence is at ten feet and the other edge is at 14 feet. Mr. Drell read from the minutes of January 11, 1997: "Action: Moved by Commissioner Gregory, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to approve the fence and material of new fence in front of residence at 4 feet high and 12 feet from face of curb (which was the beginning of the property). Commission also moved to allow the existing front yard fence to remain at it's present height of 6 feet subject to it being moved to 12 feet from the face of curb or with an encroachment permit received from the Department of Public Works. Motion carried 6-0." GRIanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 7 {, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES A fence existed here at some point in time, but there were oleanders in front of it. The applicant stated they had not applied for a permit as the fence was 12 feet from the curb. There is no record of an encroachment permit having been obtained for the right-of-way. Now the building has been built and a driveway constructed and the fence has been replaced at its current location. Therefore, a different situation exists. As the fence (ie, gate) is not screened by oleanders and stands over the driveway. The request is for an exemption for both material and distance from the curb for the height. The issues at hand were that a fence was put up that was closer than requested and/or taller than approved and also a gate was put up that was not addressed. It was also noted that the fence would have been obscured by oleanders prior to construction of the garage. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that if wood fences are approved, they are required to be screened with landscaping. With a driveway going into the garage and with the fence now a gate, there is no opportunity to screen it. This becomes an entirely different issue. Mr. Louis Scalise, representing the applicant, stated the fence was originally built to house a mobile home with a gate in the front and in the center. When the mobile home was removed, he planted it with oleanders. When the new construction started, he removed some of the oleanders for the driveway. The old fence was setback 10 feet. He moved the fence back to approximately 14 feet 9 inches. It is the same fence that was there before. It looks different because it is on different posts, there's a concrete slab there, and is arranged differently on the property. He stated he had a bunch of junk and old vehicles that he wanted to screen from public view. The gate is the same boards as the original fence. Commissioner Gregory explained to Mr. Scalise that wood fences are not normally approved unless they can be screened by plant material and that cannot be done on a driveway. That is an immediate concern of the Commission. The Commission was not concerned with the fencing, but the gate at the driveway makes all the difference. Ms. Leeann Blystone, President of the Silver Spur Ranch Homeowner's Association, stated the association does not allow wooden fences. The applicant had not received permission or approval from the association for a wooden fence, certainly not one that high or that close to the street. One important consideration is way the fence juts out on the curve. It could be a safety problem as the resident tries to pull out of G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES his driveway. She stated the association did not object to individual needs in terms of how people want to store their vehicles. However, they do object to what happens to the property. Property owners buy and sell and leave and the property remains the same. Even though this property looks very nice with the oleanders in front of the fence, if he elects to sell the property, whoever moves in there inherits the problem. If they don't keep it up, the association is back to square one in that it is still against code, too close to the street, and a safety hazard. Ms. Diane Harvill lives across the street from the property. To set the record straight, she stated there was a wooden fence there prior to the excavation and building. It was screened by oleanders and well maintained. However, since the building has gone up, a driveway has come into effect. The wooden materials used for the gate - it is no longer a fence, it opens and closes - might be the same material that was there prior to, but prior to it was a solid fence covered by oleanders. The gate is unattractive and in violation of City code and the association's CC&Rs. Commissioner Gregory noted this was first reviewed in January 14, 1997, five years ago. With a decision having been made five years ago, now work has been done in terms of the building and the driveway. This should be looked at again because it is a different ball game. He suggested it be continued to the next meeting to allow members the opportunity to go by the property. Commissioner Hanson asked if that would change the outcome. Commissioner Hanson recommended denying the request for the wood gate. Mr. Scalise asked that the Commission come to look at the property. Commissioner Gregory explained that another type of gate material would be acceptable. The wooden gate is against code and the Commission has never approved a wooden gate. He was encouraged to put up another type of gate that meets the City's code. Mr. Drell stated the Commission's action was appealable to the City Council within 15 days. G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 9 *ftw Now, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Lingle, denied the request for the wooden gate for the following reasons: Previous approvals of 6-foot fences at less than 15 feet of setback have typically provided extensive landscape planting to break up the mass of the fence. Considering that this wooden fence (gate) is located across a driveway it is not possible to install landscaping to screen the gate. The existing fence is not affected by this motion denying the request for the wooden gate. Motion carried 6-0. B. Preliminary Plans 1. CASE NO.: PP/CUP 01-17 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JIM HOOD, ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY, 3350 E. Concours Street, #26N, Ontario, CA 91764 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of revised plans for automobile fuel station, car wash, and convenience store LOCATION: 74-950 Gerald Ford Drive, northwest corner of Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive ZONE: PCD, FCOZ Mr. Smith displayed the revised site and architectural plans for the proposed fuel station and convenience store. The originally proposed car wash has been eliminated. Some of the retention areas have been retained, however, on the corner of Gerald Ford and Cook, they have managed significant berming, up to 8 feet. The convenience store building now reflects the 3600 sq.ft. structure opposed to the previous 4200 sq.ft. building. Mr. Jim Hood, Mr. Craig Yamasaki, the Planning/Development Manager, and Mr. Alex Quieves, the project's architect, attended as the applicant's representatives. Mr. Hood listed the items that had been revised: 1) the car wash has been removed, 2) additional landscaping between the Hampton Inn and the project as well as along the perimeter and in particular at the corner with substantial berming, 3) indicated the landscaping at a full-grown scale, 4) moved the building towards the west, 5) changed the head-in parking on the west side of G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES the building from a straight line to staggered parking spaces, 6) added architectural embellishments, including tile and brick, to match the canopy to the building, and 7) removed some of the color bands from the rear of the building and removed some of the trade dress (trademarks, logos, colored bands). The site flows much better- it is spread out and open, user friendly. Mr. Yamasaki noted that this facility doesn't look anything like the standard fuel station. ARCO's trade dress is a blue canopy with a silver stripe. That component, as well as others, have been removed because they know this location is a gateway to the City. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if there would be any signage on the canopy. Mr. Hood stated that there would only be their "spark" which is an emblem people use to identify as ARCO. He continued this was a completely re-designed building specifically for this site. This building is brand new, has never been built before, one of a kind. It is specifically designed for women shoppers - a lot of their traffic is for women. The AM/PM store is brighter, with upgraded products and a deli. Commissioner Hanson asked if the roof access ladder could be put on the inside of the building, not on the outside wall. The applicant replied they would lose a little storage area or have to rearrange the insides, but it could be done. Commissioner Vuksic stated the building lacks detail. He asked how the roof-mounted equipment would be screened. They are located in the cener of the building's roof and will be screened by parapet walls all the way around. With the units at the middle of the building, the site lines show that they won't be seen. Mr. Hood guaranteed that all of the mechanical units would be screened. Mr. Vuksic calculated a sight line from 66 feet away, a 6-foot person would be able to see the backside of the parapets. Mr. Hood replied that the parapets would be 3- dimensional and finished all around. Commissioner Hanson stated the lower parapet would have to be raised. The applicant responded that the mechanical units will be recessed. Mr. Hood re-stated that they would guarantee that none of the mechanical equipment would be seen from the street. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if that meant not being seen from the overpass as that was a view coming into the city. Mr. Hood explained he was talking in the area around the site. He didn't know if it would be possible to completely screen it from the overpass as it was quite a bit higher. Commissioner Vuksic stated he saw some boxes and the same cornice detail on everything. He doesn't see articulating forms and interesting G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd l l itwe ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9,2001 MINUTES juxtapositions. He noted that the tiles have been added to create some interest. But the brick at the base of the building and pillars doesn't have any depth. The header above the door looks as though there was left over space with no thought to articulating anything there. He is bothered by the colored banding and the 24-hour box signs. Commissioner O'Donnell stated he had expected more. He gave credit for some of the issues that were raised during the previous meeting. He acknowledged that two of the ten gas pumps have been eliminated for a total of eight which makes the island work better. He was hoping to see more connectiveness to the canopy and the building. He had hoped the building would be designed for the corner and would not be a proto-typical type building recognizing they had made some modifications. He is opposed to the six "24-hour" signs. Is there a need to say "24-hours"that many times? He asked if the "24-hour" signs would also be used for advertising products. The applicant stated they would not be used to advertise products. The rear elevation (to Gerald Ford) needs more architecture or done differently. It needs to address the street differently than it does right now. Commissioner O'Donnell continued that he was sensitive to the items Commissioner Vuksic has mentioned about the banding and so on. The signage that is shown takes away from the architecture and makes the building a sign. If the store is going to be open 24 hours, it can be done differently than plastering it all over the building. Commissioner Gregory re-emphasized that they have done a very fine job in addressing the comments from before on the site plan. The site plan is quite workable now. The critique is focusing on the building and these can be handled without too much trouble. When the canopy lights are on at night, they will have far greater impact than a plethora of 24-hour signs. But, he understands that they may want people to see the fact that they are open 24 hours and have it lodged in their minds. Perhaps, the number of signs can be reduced. The mechanical units could be further hidden by raising one of the levels of the papapets up, if that would be architecturally attractive. The some of the banding around the building could be eliminated to avoid overkill; keep it on the store front. Mr. Yamasaki asked if it would be possible to suggest some changes in response to the comments made in hopes that they might be able to move forward to the next step. Commissioner Gregory asked the Commission if it were in a situation where the major concern elements from the pervious meeting have been addressed and the items that G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 12 'rr. ; ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES have been brought up during this meeting can be specifically called out with a solution for each one so the project can move along. Commissioner Lingle expressed concern with the canopy's lighting. He also commented that the applicants had done a very good job in addressing the Commission's concerns of the previous meeting. Mr. Yamasaki suggested in the interest of compromise there are some elements in design the applicant would like to see. The critical ones is some identity from Gerald Ford. There is identity on Cook Street because of the monument sign. If the accent bands are offensive, he would propose eliminating them on the sides. He also proposed eliminating the 24-hour signs, however, he would like to keep at least one. The elimination of the car wash was painful as it is a very good source of revenue. The tougher issue is the screening of the mechanical equipment. It is reasonable for them to screen it from view. If there are some things where the cure isn't worth than the disease, they would address it. However, there are some components of the building that will be visible from the overpass. Within reason, they can screen those and use design situations to address that, perhaps by raising the parapet walls along the sides. The the accents were added to become harmonious with the rest of the development. They want this as clean and elegant as a gas station can be. He is willing to go back to upper management to say they got the project approved subject to the Commission's recommendations. Commissioner Vuksic felt they could do some creative architecture on the roof by creating some forms that would screen the equipment. This may not mean taking the walls all the way across on the sides. He suggested breaking out of the symmetry and create a higher element somewhere that can house the mechanical equipment. Regarding the Hampton Inn, the intent is to complement it, not to match it. Mr. Yamasaki's goal is to get the project approved and he is willing to stipulate to the fact that they would screen the visible equipment. Commissioner Vuksic pointed out that the west elevation showed trees hiding the elevation and that shouldln't be counted on. Something should be done -the service door needs to be incorporated architecturally or should be screened. The building color has been lightened in order to be more appealing in the area. Commissioner Hanson suggested they do something with the sign over the front door and do something that makes it an architectural G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs%gmin\AR011009.min.wpd 13 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES statement within the element, may be adding some canterra stone or the to set it apart and make it interesting. She provided the applicant with possibilities. Mr. Yamasaki stated they would take the colored banding off the east and west elevations, but he would like them to remain on the front side. Commissioner Hanson suggested adding a pop-out or indent to add more architecture to take your eye off the fact that this is just big, block elements. Mr. Yamasaki stated while he didn't necessarily agree with all the comments, he was willing to recommend them to management in order to move the project forward. The goal of everyone is to have an attractive project which makes everyone happy. The focus appears to be on the building. It is clear that there should be some more detail, work to screen certain elements. Commissioner Gregory recommended the Commission provide the applicants with a specific list of items they should address and bring it back. Commissioner Vuksic stated what the Commission did not want to do is design the building for them. It has made some clear suggestions and how quickly it gets approved is up to the applicants. Mr. Yamasaki stated his domain was working with entities such as this and striking a win-win solution. He noted they have convinciing demonstrated that they have met the Commission's requests more than half way on all the big issues. What is left is a gingerbread piece here and there. He believes they came in with something wonderful. They've gone a long way and would like to go on to the next step. Commissioner O'Donnell stated the applicants have made significant improvements on the site plan. They are to be commended for that. Their agreement to reduce some of the Commission's objections about the building and the signage are also well taken. However, the architectural comments should not be seen as gingerbread. The fuel station across Cook Street is a standard and is going to be a neighbor. It is a good project. Mr. Smith noted the applicant was desirous of being at the Planning Commission's November 6. That is still doable given the direction that has come forward today. If they can come back with some of the changes, they can be scheduled for the next Commission meeting on October 23. Mr. Yamasaki asked if it would be reasonable for him to think that by complying with the Commission's specific recommendations, they won't facing additional ideas during the next meeting. Commissioner Vuksic stated it was reasonable for the Commission not to come up with additional ideas. He concern is that some of the commets are general G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR01 1 009.min.wpd 14 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES because this revised proposal is not a very good attempt which causes the Commission to make more general broadbrushed comments which are more difficult for the applicant to pinpoint. The specific items that were addressed and how they are interpreted might leave them open for some more comments. Mr. Smith stated staff would be prepared to fax revised elevations to the Commission during the next week in order to get preliminary comments for the next meeting. Applicant was advised they could fax the revised elevations to staff. The landscape comments will be addressed prior to the next meeting by the City's Landscape Manager. Commissioner Lingle noted the Commission was willing to take plans that are faxed back, but not willing to provide the applicant the opportunity to take what they have been given today and then bring it back to staff for approval. Are the discrepancies in the project so gross that it warrants additional review by the Commission. He felt this wasn't the case. He stated this is one of the reasons why people have the trepidation about working with the City. This is bureaucracy at its best. This applicant has bent over backward. This is a good looking project. It could be improved with some of the suggestions made by the Commission. This doesn't make any sense to continue it. Commissioner Van Vliet stated some of the revisions that have to be made are significant, not just minor things. Commissioner Lingle responded that several times during the meeting the applicant had stated they would be willing to hide the mechanical equipment. Demonstrate to staff how that is going to be done to eliminate the concerns. In respect to the architecture on the front, the applicant stated he was willing to do that. In terms of the lighting, they said they were willing to cooperate. What we have here is an applicant who has said they will do what the Commission wants them to do. Please tell them what you want them to do. Commissioner O'Donnell responded if that were the case he would ask them to re-design the building. He is asking that they do the best with what they have here. From a certain point of view, it is adequate, satisfactory. It could be a lot better. Commissioner Lingle agreed, but stated "it is what it is - an AM/PM mini-market." And, a very good looking one. Commissioner O'Donnell stated its location was significant as a gateway into the City. It deserves a lot more consideration to the building's architecture. They did a good job on the site plan. G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 15 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES Action: Commissioner O'Donnell moved, seconded by Commissioner Vuksic, to continued the case with the following comments 1) create architectural forms that would completely screen the roof-top mechanical equipment, this may not mean taking the walls all the way across the sides; break up the symmetry and create a higher element that can house the equipment, 2) remove some of the 24-hour signs, 3) remove banding on the east and west elevations, 4) move the roof- access ladder to the inside, 5) add articulating forms/ interesting juxtapositions to all sides of the building, 6) add depth to the brick at the base of the building and pillars, 7) articulate the header above the door, make the sign an architectural statement within the element, maybe add canterra stone or tile, 8) complement the Hampton Inn, don't match it, 9) the west elevation service door should be screened. Applicant was advised to fax revised elevations to staff to forward to Commission members during the week. Motion carried 5-1 with Commission Lingle opposed. 2. CASE NO.: PP 01-22 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): ART JORDAN, 6150 N. 16'h Street, Suit 200, Phoenix, AZ 85016 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of revised plans for an office/industrial complex, UNIVERSITY COMMERCE CENTER LOCATION: North side of Gerald Ford, east of College Business Park ZONE: PCD Mr. Smith stated the Commission had had some concerns relative to the 2-story office building in front facing Gerald Ford. The applicant distributed a letter indicating the changes they have made since their last presentation. Mr. Wes Balmer of Balmer Architectural Group stated they attempted to appease each of the items discussed in the last meeting. Starting with the office building in front, there was a notation to step the south (front) side. Because of structural elements, they stepped only about 3 inches between each of the three colorations above the windows on the ground floor. The coloration differences provide the impression of stepping. The primary impact of the stepping will be seen on the ends where there are larger overhangs that provide more character. This also provides a patio area for employees. GRanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 16 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES Other Commission comments regarding the rear buildings concerned the straight parapet lines, trying to get some undulation, add some color and contrast. They changed the buildings' color from grey/black to contrasting colors and desert hues. Mr. Balmer pointed out the changes and improvements on each building. Stair elements are being created as architectural elements that are separate from the buildings' mass by using reflective colored glass. He stated they will completely berm and use low walls along the perimeter to screen the parking. The trees proposed for the parking area have been changed and will provide 50% coverage at maturity. The amount of turf has been substantially reduced.. Commissioner Gregory stated the applicant had responded very nicely to the Commission concerns and comments. In providing some of the breakup of the straight roof line, particularly with the stairwells, it is evident they had done a lot of thinking about this. Commissioner Hanson stated she had had a lot of concerns on Building B - it has been very nicely done and handled well. She did express concern about the use of reflective glass as it is not appropriate for here. As far as the color, it is fine. She likes the stair towers, they are a nice addition. In fact, there are two sets of stairs in each tower- one each for the tenants on each side. The stairwells are placed where they think the logical breakups would be for the different offices and tenant requirements. Building B (the middle building) has no jogs on the elevation. The applicant responded the building is an arc which in itself gives it architectural element. The other part of it is in having 50 percent of the parking lot landscaped. At maturity, you won't be able to see the buildings at the back of the project. The upper story windows were originally the same-sized banded windows. They have done a combination of window sizes to give a variety instead of banded windows all the way around. Commissioner Vuksic commented on the solar resistant glass. He noted the AG Edwards building on the southwest corner of Portola and Hwy. 111 and stated he could not support reflective glass. Reflective glass is called out for all the windows on every elevation. The applicant responded the upper story windows were to be a dark blue/green which is also reflective, but it doesn't have a high reflectivity appearance. He offered to get a sample for the Commission. In order to make the glass G:PlanninglGale Santee\wpdocs\AgmMAR011009.min.wpd 17 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES resist the heat gain from the sun, it is almost the type of glass they are forced into. The windows are revealed +/- 12 inches in Building D, the office building. On the others, instead of sitting them on the face of the wall will be recessed about 4.5 - 5 inches. Commissioner Vuksic asked if the blue/green reflective glass were not used, how would the applicant handle the entry of Building A. The applicant responded that he like using the glass as a mass because it adds some lightness and richness to the building. It brings the perceived value of the building up. Commissioner Gregory suggested using the ceramic glass that is being used at the Edwards Cinema building at the River project in Rancho Mirage. It has little ceramic dots in the glass. The entire south elevation of the theater is all glass and they got it to work with this interesting glass. Commissioner Vuksic expressed concern about the 3 inch stepbacks on the front elevation of the office building. The rendering looks fabulous. The applicant stated on a two-story building it wasn't feasible to have steps going back. By having only 3-inch step backs and using color variations, when the major steps are noted at the ends of the building, it will be a mental imagery that the whole building is stepped more than it is. He commended the applicants on the revised elevations. The office building will be an effice system versus concrete tilt-up. The back buildings will be 95 percent concrete and some sections with effice. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if there will be that much color contrast between the tones or be washed out and more uniform because they are pre-cast. The elevations show some definite contrasting colors. The applicant noted that where there is pre-cast concrete, it will be painted. The integral color is only on the effice. He noted that final colors will be selected by putting 8-foot square samples on the building to see if the colors look as they want them to. The shocking blue will more likely be dusty blue. Commissioner Hanson suggested experimenting with other colors, ie, magenta, because blue will fade in the desert. The applicant agreed saying that any strong color, even in the reds, will fade, though paints have gotten a little better. The blue adds some coolness. G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\WR011009.min.wpd 18 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9,2001 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to grant preliminary approval the plans subject to confirmation of the reflective glass through further study. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner O'Donnell absent. 3. CASE NO.: MISC 01-18 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): JOHN J. CODY, 74-277 Hwy. 111, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised exterior elevations for re-construction of an existing fire-damaged apartment duplex LOCATION: 44-211 San Pasqual ZONE: R-2 Commissioner Vuksic commented the concept of having a box and putting a different grid through it is fine, but it doesn't seem to be reading that way. The angle is acceptable. This is building that has no architecture to it and they are dealing with an existing structure. Yet, the original building was a cube with a slice taken out of it. Wrought iron has been added to make it appear more open. Commissioner Lingle stated if the structure were off the street, there would be no problem. The Commission recommended covering up the exposed areas to creat a more cubist mass and ensuring the sections match the elevations and installing the wider roof line on all sides. Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Lingle, to approve the plan subject to covering up the exposed areas to create a more cubist mass and ensuring the fascia match the elevation and be the wider dimension on all sides. Motion carried 4-0-2 with Commissioners Gregory and O'Donnell absent. G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 19 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES 4. CASE NO.: PP 01-25 APPLICANT(AND ADDRESS): ROBERT SONNENBLICK, SONNENBLICK/DEL RIO, LLC., 12011 San Vincente Blvd., Suite 350, Los Angeles, CA 90049 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of architectural plans for a 5-story luxury hotel, parking structure, and eight casita units and landscape plan LOCATION: Desert Willow Resort Hotel ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Sonneblick started his presentation with good news: They had just received a call that their $60 million loan commitment from General Motors on the conference center is being faxed to them tomorrow. The resort property is to the southwest corner of Desert Willow Drive's circle, it is to be located to the west of Desert Willow Drive. The EIR is already approved and vested. The applicant is designing the resort hotel to the existing EIR, there will be no height or size variances. He noted the tennis courts and health club will be located on the third floor of the parking garage. The hotel has two five-story wings. There is a set of eight low-rise two-story casitas. There is a large lake on the south end and swimming pool located at the north end of the property and conform in concept to Desert Willow. They are using colors and materials which dovetail with the existing clubhouse so that everything will look as one cohesive resort. That same concept is being carried through with the landscaping. There is also a putting course on the east side of the hotel. Commissioner Hanson expressed concern with the entrance road from Desert Willow Drive and its proximity to the 3-story parking structure. She asked about the sense of entry into the beautiful building as you have to go by the garage to get there. Isn't there another way to do that? The pool, being on the north side, will be in shade most of the day during the winter time. By flipping the lake with the pool, the pool will get full sun and less wind. What will the impact of having the tennis courts on the third floor with lights and green fencing be? The lights could be on until 10:00 p.m. and the fencing will be seen from the golf course. Mr. Wong, the G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\ AR011009.min.wpd 20 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES project's architect, responded that the first floor of the garage is below grade. Commissioner Hanson stated that they needed a lot more work. Mr. Sonnenblick stated the project was 16.5 acres. To do a 4- or 5-star hotel, he has to have tennis (4 courts) and just doesn't have a spot. He asked if anyone had any suggestions regarding where the tennis courts and health club could be sited. Commissioner Vuksic asked why they needed a lake. Mr. Sonnenblick stated if he wanted to get $200/night room rate, it was a good amenity. Commissioner Hanson suggested putting the lake along the entry to create a "sense of arrival" similar to that of the Marriott Desert Springs. The sense of arrival is critical to a building like this. Mr. Sonnenblick noted that the City Council had requested that the garage be located near the existing parking lot to be used for overflow parking. Commissioner Hanson asked if the parking could be located under the conference center of the resort hotel. Mr. Wong replied the difference in cost would be $7000-$7500 per stall vs $20,000 per stall for below grade parking. He stated he just finished a 834-car garage above grade at $7,500 a stall. He also just finished a 282-car garage below grade, 3-1/2 levels down, over$20,000 a stall in West Los Angeles. Commissioner Vuksic stated he was getting quotes for $12,000 a stall for one level down. Mr. Wong explained the differences were in the requirements for air circulation, sprinkler system, ventilation -that's why the price goes up. You cannot build a garage below grade for less than $15,000 per stall, especially if you are more than one level below. Mr. Drell stated there was a fundamental site planning problem. Most people driving up to the clubhouse or visiting the resort are not going to see the hotel, they are only going to see the parking garage. That is the dominant piece of architecture the way the site plan is laid out. Mr. Sonnenblick responded that while driving up, you can't miss the hotel. Commissioner Hanson asked if they had to enter off the circle. The possibility of making a left-hand turn from Desert Willow Drive prior to reaching the circle was discussed. It would require a slight change in the golf course at that fairway. The tenth tee was moved for the forthcoming conference hotel on the other side. The applicant would gladly agree to having the left-hand turn if the City would allow it. Commissioner Hanson suggested flipping the entire project so that the garage/gym was at the south end. Mr. Sonnenblick responded that they were attempting to have the rooms view the golf course. By doing so, the first thing to be seen is the garage, but it can be bermed and G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 21 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES landscaped. The project is not doing itself justice by having the entrance the way it is. Having a putting green was questioned when there is one at Desert Willow. Mr., Sonnenblick explained it was a real putting course, not just a green. Mr. Drell asked if they could afford given all the other constraints to have the putting course. Mr. Wong pointed out details about the garage, the 5-story wings of the hotel, and its 2-story administrative/restaurant/shops/conference center (including meeting rooms and ball room). As you drive into the hotel, you see the health club, the 2.5 story garage. As you continue around, you see the 2-level hotel with the bar room and restaurant. The wings of the hotel are terraced down to give the feeling of being against the mountains. The top floor is all suites. The other four levels are guest rooms. The mechanical equipment will be on the roof. The eight casitas are 2-story. You enter at the middle - go down half level facing the golf course. The casitas would have two bedrooms. He presented the elevations for the casitas. Looking at the casitas from the golf course they are two-storied. Mr. Sonnenblick asked what he had to do vis-a-vis the City Council to be allowed to cut a left-hand entrance. Mr. Drell responded it would be a good idea to have a joint meeting with the Council and ARC in order to get all the information at one time. He pointed out there was meeting with the Planning Commission, City Council, and ARC with the architects. It took one meeting with all the players together to get progress. Mr. Folkers added it would be beneficial to get the City staff together first in order to have a basis to go forward to that type of meeting. Mr. Sonnenblick stated they would definitely flip the lake and swimming pool locations. He asked if having the tennis courts up the air would be something the Commission would not entertain. Commissioner Hanson stated were going to have to not look like tennis courts with the green screening. It could be handled by superior architecture. Right now the tennis courts are on the opposite end of the spectrum from what would be acceptable. Mr. Sonnenblick apologized, but mentioned that the cost of doing something wild with tons of landscaping and backside covers on the lights would be $100,000 on a $10 million project. Dollar- wise he can do it, but he asked for input from the Commission as to what they would suggest. Commissioner O'Donnell asked if it were possible to put two levels of parking below grade and having the health club/tennis courts at grade. There are a total of 500 parking stalls. The response was to leave it at its proposed height, but to spend the effort G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 22 1*000 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES on the exterior so it won't look like a tennis court and garage. However, the lights at night would still be a problem. Commissioner O'Donnell pointed out that driving into the resort, you'd still be going by a 2.5 story building. If all the parking could be below grade.....the grade drops pretty fast. The Commission had objections about the tennis court's fencing, lights, and height. It felt the applicant did have options to make it look not like a tennis court. By relocating the entry way (left-hand turn)from the place where the resort's entry road is now proposed leaves enough space to berm up against the garage wall. Commissioner Vuksic suggested moving some of the parking somewhere else on the site to drop some of the height. The first impression of the garage/tennis court is that it is an incredibly large mass. It would be difficult to turn it into architecture to disguise the tennis court. . Mr. Folkers noted the distance from the ring road into the resort seems short. There are times when the Marriott has a big event, their entry drive fills up. It would be his recommendation to the City Manager to have staff get together with the applicant to provide all the answers to help move it along as fast as possible. Mr. Drell stated if relocating the ingress/egress to the resort hotel becomes a subject, they would have to be very careful about stepping on the toes of the golf course's layout. Mr. Sonnenblick believed it could be done properly. Commissioner Vuksic stated the hotel elevations needed something to create some massing. Currently, the elevations have a spindly looking structural grid in both directions, full of glass. He recommended doing something to add vertical mass between rooms. Mr. Knight commented there were some landscape issues that don't comply with City ordinances which he will discuss with the project's landscape architect. There is too much turf. The palm lined entry is similar to the Marriott Desert Springs. He noted this project was being planned in conjunction with the Desert Willow theme and palm trees don't grow in lines in an oasis. G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 23 NOW ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9,2001 MINUTES Action: Commissioner Vuksic moved, seconded by Commissioner Lingle, to continue the case to allow applicant the opportunity to reconsider the siting of the hotel, garage, tennis courts/health club, entrance drive, lake and pool, and landscaping per the City's Landscape Manager's comments. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Commissioner Gregory abstaining. C. MISCELLANEOUS 1. CASE NO.: CUP 96-28, TT 28450 and TT 28451 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MELISSA HIGGS, BAKER MCGARVA HART ARCHITECTURE, 1285 West Pender, Vancouver, British Columbia, CANADA V6E 4131 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Discussion of revisions to architecture for future phases for INTRAWEST RESORT OWNERSHIP CORPORATION, CLUB INTRAWEST Palm Desert Phase III-VI LOCATION: Willow Ridge Drive ZONE: PR-5 Mr. Ron Lea of Baker, McGarva, Hart Architecture, introduced Bill Enman and Chuck Shepherdson, and Tim Rodsby as members of the applicant's team. Mr. Lea's firm did the original work on the IntraWest Clubhouse. They noted that today's presentation was for general information and to bring the Commission up to date on their project and to gain some consensus that they were staying within their original principals and vision in respect to Desert Willow. Mr. Enman stated IntraWest has four other locations in North America and in development of five more for its 10,000 members. Palm Desert was their third and is their largest campus. Unlike the time-share concept, there is no such thing as a home resort, there are no weeks - they sell an elevated membership to a club which has a points-based membership. As they expand their network of locations, members beneficially own the same interest in every location. They offer flexible use of any of the locations. The original concept for the Palm Desert site was to be community of clustered groups of vacation homes. Each group has a little different character to give a sense of neighborhood within the project. Members GRIanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 24 r ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9,2001 MINUTES don't necessarily choose their"villa" within the project by location, but by function. The largest shift in the business has been the different types of demands, ie, families, adult couples, golf get-aways. In this project, the buildings would appeal more to family groups on the north side of the road with pools with shallow ends. Those on the south side of the road are being geared to more of short-term adult-driven stay with lap pools not less than 4.5 feet in depth. Every building is intentionally on a slightly different access and elevation which creates different shadow angles and a diversity of character, color, and landscape forms. Mr. Lea stated the reason they were there was to make sure that they are adhering to the architectural principals of the development agreement. The first third of the project includes the resort and presentation center and a series of haciendas accessed from Country Club. The infrastructure for the second third of the project comes off Portola. Commissioner Hanson asked if the architecture was different in any way from what is there. The applicant responded the architectural principals and elements were the same. The difference lay in the number of units per building. The principals and the elements remain the same. Action: Commissioner Hanson moved, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to grant preliminary approval as presented Motion carried 4-0-2 with Commissioners Gregory and O'Donnell absent. 2. CASE NO.: CUP 00-6 or SA 01-87 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MICHAEL LIN, FRED FIEDLER & ASSOCIATES, 2322 West Third Street, Los Angeles, CA 90067-1906 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Clarification of background color of"On the Run" sign for EXXON/MOBIL LOCATION: 36-650 Cook Street ZONE: PCD, FCOZ Mr. Smith advised the Commission that it had approved the sign program for the Mobil station on Cook and Gerald Ford. Staff asked for GRanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.m1n.wpd 25 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES clarification. The sign company was asking if it was acceptable to put a yellow plastic background behind each of the wall mounted "On the Run" signs. Commissioner Van Vliet noted that the building elevations do not show yellow sign backgrounds. Action: The Commission concurred that the yellow background should only be on the freestanding sign. 3. Waiver of Wall Requirements for Sandpiper Development Request that ARC waive the setback requirements for the proposed walls around the perimeter and approved walls in excess of six feet in height for attenuation purposes of Highway 74 and Pitahaya Street, requested by Richard Folkers, Assistant City Manager for Development Services. The City and the Sandpiper Development are mutually agreeing to remove the existing oleanders that are dying and replacing them with sidewalks and block walls. The issue is before the Commission because some of the walls are in excess of six feet in height and some sections where they are only six feet in height do meet the 15-foot setback requirement due to the constraints of the site. Mr. Richard Folkers, Assistant City Manager for Development Services, introduced himself. He stated this is a project that the City has been working with Sandpiper on since 1989. Mr. Knight has been working with the association's landscape architect on to El Paseo side. The project is intended to be completed in the next couple of months regarding sidewalks and mini-retaining wall along the south side of El Paseo. The walls to be built as sound blockers are along Pitahaya, Hwy. 74, and El Paseo. There will be a mini-wall, about 12-18 inches high, that will serve as a planter between the mini-wall and the higher block wall. The City will be responsible for the landscaping within that planter. It will be similar to the Avondale slump stone wall along Country Club. The wall will have a cap. Pilasters will be added at determined intervals. The walls will run along the south side of El Paseo, the west side of Hwy. 74, and the north side of Pitahaya. Commissioner Van Vliet asked what the walls would look like - how tall they are, how many pilasters are there, where are the grade breaks in the walls in terms of height,just to make sure it all ties together. The Avondale wall varies between six and seven feet. In this case, along El G:Planning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 26 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES Paseo it will be six feet, however, because of the grade dropping on Hwy. 74, it will be eight feet. It looked as though the height would be 8- foot, 6-inches along El Paseo. Mr. Folkers responded that the idea was to cut down on the noise. Commissioner Hanson asked if it could be bermed. Mr. Folkers stated something like that had been done by the high school and Phyllis Jackson where there is an 8-foot wall but doesn't look that high. Commissioner Hanson suggested berming up about two feet and landscaping. The City will be landscaping the area along El Paseo. The other landscaping will be the association's responsibility. A sidewalk will be installed along Pitahaya. The wall be effectively 6' 5" high because of the grade.differential. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if the sidewalk had to be six feet wide and wondered if pockets could be put against the wall for landscaping, in particular vines as used on the pillars of the Civic Center which don't need much room. Mr. Folkers agreed pockets could be put in for vines, but would like to keep the sidewalks at six feet. Commissioner Vuksic recommended jogging the El Paseo wall in and out as it goes along. Perhaps in places where it is broken for the elevation. Representatives of the Sandpiper association pointed out that there are a lot of driveways along the way which will break up the wall. There are existing pilasters with wrought iron gates at driveways and the wall is designed to tie into them. The pilasters are painted precision block with lights on the sides of each. Commissioner Van Vliet asked how the precision block pilasters were going to tie in with the slump stone walls. It was suggested the existing pilasters be veneered with slump stone. There would be a cap on the pilasters. Action: Commissioner Van Vliet moved, seconded by Commissioner Hanson, granted approval subject to 1) veneering the existing pilasters with slump stone or plaster to match the new block walls with caps that match the caps of the wall, 2) adding pilasters in the expanses between driveways, 3) adding off-sets in the walls where there is room, 4) on Pitahaya, the sidewalk will be 5 feet wide with a 12-inch planter, 5) build berms on Hwy. 74 to add some undulation and reduce the apparent height of the wall, and 6) in expanses longer than 100 feet, add undulation to the wall. Landscape plan will be reviewed by the City Landscape Manager. Motion carried 4-0-2 with Commissioners Gregory and O'Donnell absent. GRIanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 27 errâ–º' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 2001 MINUTES 4. Architectural Awards Discussion The Commission had asked for guidelines in terms of what to base their decisions on and how to judge them. Mr. Drell stated the City Council had directed that the Commission make those decisions. Categories previously mentioned were: industrial, commercial, custom homes, tract homes, re-modeled commercial, re-model residential, retail center, tenant improvement, and apartment/condos. Mr. Drell stated there wouldn't be just one winner. If the Commission believes there are 3, 4, or 5 custom homes worthy of recognition, that is what will happen. The Commission decided the public should make nominations for the Architectural Awards. The nominations would be submitted to the Commission for review and final selections. Action: The Commission decided the public should make nominations for the Architectural Awards. The nominations would be submitted to the Commission for review and final selections. Vl. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m. STEVE SMITH PLANNING MANAGER GRanning\Gale Santee\wpdocs\Agmin\AR011009.min.wpd 28